Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'AMD Flavor' started by cybereality, May 27, 2019.
Thanks for the link!
I wonder if there will be a 5800...
It do annoy me they benched in strange brigade which are a team red title, i would be much more interested in seeing if the new architecture had any say in titles that are considered to be team green titles.
BUT wont be long now before we will see.
I believe AMD messed up with one of their presentation slides, noting the "Radeon 5700-series GPUs", which should have been the "Radeon 5000-series GPUs", now others are quoting this '5700-series' malarkey...
Hoping we will see:
Radeon 5500 = 1660
Radeon 5600 = 2060
Radeon 5700 = 2070
Radeon 5800 = 2080
Radeon 5900 = 2080 Ti
Yeah, clearly this is the absolute best angle for the product. It will probably trade blows in an unbiased review.
Unless they are going back to the old-style naming, e.g. RX 5770.
Is it odd that I’m more interested in the RDNA architecture than the performance of it?
Catchy name isn't ?
In the end does it make the difference as an architecture. We don't know if this is something they will use in the next architecture as well.
That sounds so awesome
Maybe a driver "problem" as well. Where this title does not have them and maybe other titles need some driver work to be done....
They won't get close to 2080 Ti with Navi.
The rumored $450-500 price is pretty rotten for RTX 2070-level performance, if true. And going from AMD's track record with their own benchmarks, it's going to perform at or below 2070, no doubt.
On a side note, I still have an HD 5800 running in an old Alienware laptop -- we've come full circle.
If these assumptions stand, it's disheartening knowing GTX 1080 launched over three years ago at this price point. All in all, it's sad and disappointing the price/performance has barely budged in over 3 years. AMD can posit the die shrink, power improvements, new features etc until they're blue in the face (like nV did with the 2x RTX series): at the end of the day, there's nothing here that moves the needle.
I own a 2080ti. I wished 5700 beat the shit out of it but we know it cant, not yet.
I'd want the same but unfortunately that won't happen. I'm still on my Titan XP from 2016 because Turing was a let down and AMD hasn't been competitive at the high end. I've definitely gotten my money's worth with the Titan though.
RDNA = Radeon Dominating Nvidia Always.
I was a bit surprised to see it was monolithic build, i was kinda expecting the chiplet approach.
And yeah 2080ti thats a whole other performance and price bracket, if they could beat 2080ti with what is coming, common sense dictate the price would be according to that, and i an not going to spend that kind of money, not even if i was on a 1440 / 4K monitor.
Here cheapest 2080ti are a zotac to the tune of 1200 USD
Well it would not matter if AMD would match the price for the card ...
Yeah up there you get a lot of bang, but you also have to part with a lot of bucks.
Chiplets for graphics might be better done on HBM interposers- there's a lot of bandwidth moving around between cores at a much higher scale than on CPUs and they'd need to keep all of that synchronized.
You and AMD are in the same boat. They have to present a confidant face for Navi. It's already being designed into the APU for the PS5. If the technology is junk Sony will pull the contract and that's decent chunk of change for AMD.
Also, if Sony is doing it, there is a high likelihood that Navi will end up in the next Xbox as well.
They need low power, decent capability APUs for these consoles.
I just hope Navi can scale because "kind of" beating a 2070 on an AMD sponsored title is not entirely exciting.
I'm kind of thinking I will end up getting the cheapest AMD option that exceeds the performance of whatever they decide will go in the PS5. If I'm going to upgrade from my aging GTX970 I want to be at least getting next gen console level graphics performacne.
It will be an APU in the PS5, a custom 8 core + navi chip. AMD has yet to release an 8 core APU to the retail market that I'm aware of. They are releasing their updated 3200G and 3400G APUs soon, if not already that will be decent options for lower capability rigs. However, I don't think they'll exceed your 970.
You'll be better getting the new hex core Zen2 when it comes out (assuming you want a new CPU) and a GTX 1060 or a RX580/590.
In the Anandtech article, they estimated the new 5700 die size based on photos to be approx 275mm2, which is in line with the size of the 1660 (~280mm2) die. I think the closest past release similar to this is the AMD release of the 7870, which was ~230mm2 and competed roughly on a par with the previous gen beast GTX580 ~520mm2). In this case the 580 was squeezing blood from a turnip and had almost no OC margin, and the 7870 was probably, on average, single digit % slightly behind a 580). So competing with a 2070 at 450mm2 that isn't squeezed to the limit seems plausible, but I think we're getting proportionally less from die shrinks than we were going from 40 to 28nm, so maybe it ends up being 2060 level performance.
Traditionally this kind of die size is slightly larger than the typical $200-250ish range of cards (960/1060 & 7850 / RX480/580 are more in the 200-230ish mm2 range). AMD tried to undercut pretty hard with the 7850/7870 release, but I don't expect that in today's climate, so I'm guessing in the $300ish range.
That's my guess for today anyway.
Without dedicating die space to RT, and in consideration of the shrink, it does seem plausible.
Well you got what you wanted in a different way, they stepped away from GCN and if the lower end stuff is looking good then we know the bigger Navi that is coming might do great. Biggest problem is both companies are charging too much for the cards compared to the performance uplift.
Courtesy of guru 3d.
10% faster puts it at right above vega 64 performance, a card you can get for $399 today. You can get a vega 56 for $270 and easily get vega 64+ performance with undervolting and overclocking
Thanks but no thanks AMD.
I look forward to the release but really nothing exciting so far from either Nvidia or AMD.
RDNA... Radeon Does Nothing At
That's just it. Even if it's 10% above Vega, it's complete stagnation in terms of price/performance at $450-500.
The state of the PC GPU market really stinks.
I didn't expect AMD to continue with low margins. It hasn't worked all these years so they might as well price their cards similar to nVidia.
I wish I could upgrade to a new card that's ay least 50% faster than my Titan XP but there's nothing out there, not even a $1300 2080 Ti gets close to that kind of uplift. I don't know what nVidia was thinking by pushing RTX on consumers, I'd have been happier with a die the same size but no RTX, just pure performance for $799.
If AMD had a big Navi that was 20-30% faster than 2080 Ti for that price id get it--I do own a freesync 2 monitor now so I can use both brands.
You need to thank the people at Nvidia for that . And of course the people who kept buying Nvidia without their patronage this excellent segmentation. Talking about something many people on here helped to create and then complain about it.
If AMD was competitive we'd have bought Radeon GPUs. I've had a Titan XP since 2016 and AMD still can't best it.
Yeah same performance as Vega xx at the same price & power level are not good news, +10% don't sound like much for a new product from a lagging brand no matter if we talk about low / mid / high end solutions.
Coming from behind i would honestly expect more than that.
Only + to me would be if they could sell Vega XX performance now but at a significant lower price point, and since Vega xx cards have been dropping a lot in price and are still in the pipeline, then it don't make much sense to put a new product on the market with close to same performance and price.
Anyways i am sure as hell not going to update to a Vega xx card, though as a 1080P / 144hz guy i don't really need much more than that, not least factoring in that when it come to games i really cant find anything new i would take a chance on.
IF i am going to play anything now, i think it would be best if it was single player and bundled with say a new GFX card. Current multiplayer games pretty much all trigger " O hell no" in me at the first glance. so even if i got one of those as a bundle i don't think i would install it.
AMD has already stopped making Vega and it is going to be sold out soon, so it doesn't matter,
it does matter
AMD offered the same performance two years ago for the same price.
GeForce RTX 2070 is 10% faster than Radeon RX Vega 64
If it's at least as fast as the GeForce RTX 2070, then it's 10% faster than the Radeon RX Vega 64
Seems that ASrock is busy with their cards and dare to get on with it custom Navi
Exactly...I still refuse to pay $1200 for a 2080Ti when I would have bought it immediately at sub-$800 like the last generation's "Ti" card. Why wouldn't AMD charge whatever they can get based on the price structure Nvidia created? I, for one, voted with my wallet.
This all day long! Exciting to see product reveals. But how are we supposed to care about the same price/performance bracket repackaged over and over. We should be getting this performance in the $250 range three years down the road.
It's crazy that gpus are even selling right now.
They broke the chicken and the egg paradox of new technology, really mostly at their own expense.
At their own expense? I beg to differ with a $500 increase generation to generation on the founders edition 1080Ti / 2080Ti.
...and lower sales numbers as a result.
10% faster on one benchmark (Strange Brigade), I expect it to perform on par with Vega 64 and RTX 2070.